I’m wondering if Trump is even considering setting the precedent that a sitting POTUS can self pardon. Trump grants himself a pardon and BAM, he just told Biden that he can have four years in office and do the same thing. Even if Trump doesn’t care about what precedents he sets, I’ll bet Pence and Mcconnell do. with any luck they privately and vociferously argue against the act.
I would agree; at the very least there is “don’t know” as well as those binary choices.
In my case I voted “yes” but I only slightly lean that way. For sure he’ll tweet that he’s pardoned himself. Whether he’ll attempt to actually do it, bearing in mind the process might involve mentioning what the pardon is for (does it?), is another matter.
reports are wave of pardons today.
What reports?
Exactly. It’s so easy to sell this to his followers: He didn’t do anything wrong, but the “Deep State” or “Democrats” or “Soros” or whomever are coming at him with pitchforks after his presidency, so might as well protect himself despite not doing anything wrong, and haha! He’ll beat them at their own game. Always winning! His base would eat that up. You think they’d possibly care if accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt and acceptance of a crime?
Indeed. If you’re going to post something like that, @Bijou_Drains, it’s helpful to also share a cite or a source. Otherwise, it’s no better than the unsubstantiated “many people are saying” crap that 45 himself says all the time.
Axios is reporting a “scoop” that pardons will be handed down today. But other than saying Rand Paul was calling for Trump to pardon Edward Snowden, the actual facts being reported are pretty thin.
I wonder if Trump is going to pardon the person(s) responsible for the breach that led to the massive hacking of government servers.
It seems that Acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller sure does not want the Biden team to get any briefings right now for some odd reason…
To Trump, a government server is someone that brings him two scoops.
very common for bad news to be released late on Friday, especially on a holiday weekend. Of course Trump probably does not care if the pardons are seen as bad news. His sycophants will love it.
Is there any reason whatsoever that he shouldn’t try? At the very least it will delay legal proceedings against him while they sort that out and, doubtless, they would draw the process out as loooong as possible. Given his age and drawing out legal proceedings he could easily never see a day in jail (if we assume he is guilty of some crimes).
I seriously doubt that any Federal court would actually entertain the idea of a blanket pre-emptive pardon. That’s so absurd that it couldn’t possibly hold water.
I mean, he could pre-emptively pardon himself for any future mail fraud in perpetuity, or for any murders he may commit. There’s no difference between that and anything he may have done in the past, in the sense that in both cases, he hasn’t been convicted at the time he’s issuing the pardon.
Plus, a pardon is generally done after someone’s served their time, and accepting one is essentially a de-facto admission of guilt on the part of the receiver. So in essence Trump would be saying “I did all this stuff” and then if the courts chucked the pre-emptive pardon out, the prosecution could potentially turn around and use that against him as an admission of guilt, provided that the idea that it was a wrongful pardon didn’t negate the idea of it being an admission of guilt.
Well, no. That’s not how pardons work, or what a preemptive pardon means. There is no power to pardon for future crimes. A pardon only covers past crimes. A preemptive pardon covers past crimes that haven’t been prosecuted yet, and prevents them from being prosecuted. Ford gave Nixon a preemptive pardon. That didn’t mean Nixon could get away with crimes committed after his resignation.
And also Presidential Pardon only covers Federal crimes. He can’t pardon murders that fall under State law.
And it was explicitly also a blanket pardon, specifying only the dates that applied, not limited to specified acts.
Now, THEREFORE, I, GERALD R. FORD, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.
What’s the difference between a pre-emptive pardon for something you haven’t done yet, and something you haven’t been tried for yet, in terms of the law? Probably exactly nothing, as in both cases, you haven’t even been tried.
There was that Axios story. Plus, Trump called a sudden unscheduled news conference, leading to speculation/assumption that he would announce a cattle-car load of pardons. Then, no sooner had the press pool arrived, it was called off, leaving the reporters wondering what the hell just happened.
One of them is legally valid and the other is not. It’s that simple.
The first happens in the future, the second happens in the past.
I am guessing the thinking goes something like this:
(Please don’t nitpick the example being state crimes…just an illustration)
You are a special agent and pursuing terrorists with a nuclear bomb. In that pursuit you smashed windows, crashed cars, punched a cop trying to stop you, maybe tortured a person or three along the way and so on. You know…very Jack Bauer in “24” kinda stuff. Since you saved New York from a terrorist nuclear bombing the president just blanket pardons you. It just gets too fiddly trying to pardon all the myriad criminal laws you broke along the way.
But the president cannot pre-emptively pardon you from doing the same thing tomorrow. That’s just a license to let you commit mayhem.
Ironically, for almost exactly the example you gave, that license does exist in the UK. There is legislation allowing agents to commit pre-authorised crimes (but only overseas) without fear of prosecution. I’m not sure what the equivalent legislation would be in the U.S., presumably it must exist.
As you say, that’s the difference between a pardon and a license.